Our Newcastle Knights: Community ownership model for Hunter's NRL flagship

[Spot On]

Honestly, what would Wests gain by buying into the Knights?

Not much. Hence, one of the main reasons they have not jumped in.

 

[macavity]

Honestly, what would Wests gain by buying into the Knights?

What has been is not what will always be.

There is good prospect that well run and capitalised NRL clubs can turn a profit soon.

The point the negative nevilles on here are unable to grasp.

 

[Noname36]

Even if we do get money from the TV deal we need to remember that the other 15 clubs do too...all of which are already more wealthy than us.

Expenditure across the game is just going to go through the roof and we're still not going to be able to compete unless we can come up with another form of cash other than the money already given to the other 15 clubs.

 

[Burwood]

Even if we do get money from the TV deal we need to remember that the other 15 clubs do too...all of which are already more wealthy than us.

Expenditure across the game is just going to go through the roof and we're still not going to be able to compete unless we can come up with another form of cash other than the money already given to the other 15 clubs.

A point that some positive Pauls on here are unable to grasp.

 

[Spot On]

The NRL could very well get itself into deep trouble if clubs continue to turn losses after this new funding deal kicks in.

What then?

 

[slotmachine]

Perth Knights?

 

[Caped Crusader]

What has been is not what will always be.

There is good prospect that well run and capitalised NRL clubs can turn a profit soon.

The point the negative nevilles on here are unable to grasp.

Yeah you used that line before mate. I'm still unconvinced, it's the NRL after all

 

[macavity]

Even if we do get money from the TV deal we need to remember that the other 15 clubs do too...all of which are already more wealthy than us.

Expenditure across the game is just going to go through the roof and we're still not going to be able to compete unless we can come up with another form of cash other than the money already given to the other 15 clubs.

There are governance processes being imposed to control expenditure growth. The NRL needs a modicum of parity, and doesn't need clubs spending themselves broke.

And again, off-field expenditure, after a certain point, offers only marginal return.

Our facilities upgrades are already well advanced and will be top shelf. Our sports science is leading edge for the NRL. Where do we need to spend all of this money to "keep up"?

 

[Noname36]

There are governance processes being imposed to control expenditure growth. The NRL needs a modicum of parity, and doesn't need clubs spending themselves broke.

And again, off-field expenditure, after a certain point, offers only marginal return.

Our facilities upgrades are already well advanced and will be top shelf. Our sports science is leading edge for the NRL. Where do we need to spend all of this money to "keep up"?

I'm surprised you of all people are suggesting that this type of thing has ever or will ever really work in the game.

Facilities are only one tiny part of off field expenditure, but even then we need to remember that what is well advanced now and top shelf most likely won't be in 5 years time. What then?

What about being able to compete for quality support staff, the people employed to make decisions about the direction of the club on and off the field? The way I see it if we continue to have less money than all the other clubs we have 2 options: either push ourselves into debt trying to compete for the best, or, most likely, settle for less than the best and have another 25 years of smacking our heads.

 

[Spot On]

Apparently the idea atm is to cap expenditure for clubs to a bit above the average spend across all franchises - somewhere around the fourth highest spending club.

I'd like to know what each club spends atm. I have read there is a 10 million dollar gap in spending between the haves and have-nots.

If that is true, and all clubs are agreeing to this new expenditure cap, I can't see us nudging the new figure regardless of the couple million extra all clubs are getting from the NRL for the next 5 years.

Would this new expenditure cap prevent the have nots from building training facilities similar to those at Penrith or will it simply address wages growth with coaches and the number of support staff???

 

[Alex28]

It's pretty disappointing they aren't prepared to say how many shares they have sold thus far...

http://www.theherald.com.au/story/4407355/our-knights-group-set-to-ramp-up-sales-pitch/?cs=306

The safe assumption is that it isn't anywhere near as popular as they thought and they are putting a last ditch shot at it leading up to the start of the season.

 

[Knight76]

I dont think they have sold any yet, this phase was meant to be expressions of interest only, with people putting their money where their mouth is at some stage this year. AFAIK.

 

[Alex28]

40,000 shares to sell.

Less than a thousand followers on Facebook.

If they can't get communication and publicity right they are kidding themselves. I only discovered they had a Facebook page tonight!

 

[Dogs Of War]

I don't understand why they priced the shares so high. At $50 a go, it would have been more realistic. You could even have options to buy extra shares each year with your membership etc. At $500 it's a lot of money for most people to just hand out. It's not like they couldn't offer a discount, say buy 10 shares get 1 free to entice those who want to flash the cash, or provide an incentive at that level which is not available at $50.

 

[Burwood]

I can somewhat understand the $500 price- I'm more likely to pay $500 for one share than $500 for 10. If they were $50 each I don't think I'd invest any more than $100 all up. I know that doesn't make much sense logically.

 

[Dogs Of War]

I can somewhat understand the $500 price- I'm more likely to pay $500 for one share than $500 for 10. If they were $50 each I don't think I'd invest any more than $100 all up. I know that doesn't make much sense logically.

Well that's the thing. Maybe at $50 there is no discount ongoing for memberships and the like. While at $500 level there is. Maybe special functions for the people who buy big say over $3K, like a team dinner invitation Corporate box spot for a day or work out an area when those members have a private bar. There are many ways to spin in, so you can get those who can't afford to spend much, and those that have deeper pockets and would like some extra rewards for the dollars put in. And at $50 a share, as I said, you could sell more shares each year with a membership. The reward could be reaching 10 shares so you hit that mark so you recieve those extra benefits. So tiers of share ownership could be encouraged with the right model, to assist people in making a decision to invest more. Sort of like those Kickstarters that offer investors more items with a bigger donation. It's just yours would be ongoing.

 

[Alex28]

http://www.theherald.com.au/story/4470401/wests-news-intrigues-tew/?cs=306

How could Wests negotiating with the Knights possibly surprise the group?

Phil Gardner resigned from the board of the Knights last year because negotiations to buy the Knights would be a conflict of interest. This was public knowledge.

Are they that far out of touch with what's actually happening?

 

[slotmachine]

Someone tell these jokers the NRL wants nothing to do with them.

 

[Hello, I'm The Doctor]

Wests have always struck me as a bit tightassed when dealing with the Knights, but given all of the groups that have come forward, they are by for the best option...

If nothing else, it gives a formal location to the Knights fans as a little church of worship. The Leagues Club has always been for me the heart of the fanbase.

If not Wests, id say the first order of business for any owner would be to put together something similar near the stadium (a big ask, i know, but it would do wonders for the fanbase).

 

[Hello, I'm The Doctor]

http://www.theherald.com.au/story/4470401/wests-news-intrigues-tew/?cs=306

How could Wests negotiating with the Knights possibly surprise the group?

Phil Gardner resigned from the board of the Knights last year because negotiations to buy the Knights would be a conflict of interest. This was public knowledge.

Are they that far out of touch with what's actually happening?

hahah, Tew wants Wests Group to be servants of the Own Knights blokes? Why would Wests ever do that???

It seems far more reasonable for the Our Knight guys to get involved with Wests instead.

If Wests do take control, id hope they would put together a Football Board exclusively to serve the Knights. It might be good to have these Our Kngihts guys involved with that, but this form would give us WAY more stability as these guys come and go from the club...